News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:More encryption means less privacy by adrusi on Tuesday August 09, 2016 @12:43PM (#12255861)
Well, there was a declassification of cryptography as munitions, which was very important. But that kind of proves the point, doesn't it?
Re:More encryption means less privacy by Bartweiss on Tuesday August 09, 2016 @12:52PM (#12255941)
Yeah, it does.

I almost called out the crypto wars specifically, because they were a political win caused by technical means (just too hard to control exports) and enabling technical progress (didn't regulate surveillance, but made privacy securable).

To the extent that anyone has actually come to the table on this stuff, it's been as a result of technical change forcing their hand. I wouldn't be surprised if widespread encryption-by-default changes the terms of the debate and opens the door to more transparency from governments who want some degree of cooperation.

Re:More encryption means less privacy by nickpsecurity on Tuesday August 09, 2016 @03:19PM (#12257091)
"there was a declassification of cryptography as munitions"

That's the popular tale. It was partial. Lots of stuff, including high-assurance systems and custom, stayed under old classification. Such export uncertainty was a consideration in the cancellation of A1-class, VAX, Security Kernel. Here's excerpts and links from a write-up I did on it after I dug into the actual export laws:

http://pastebin.com/GHmHJASm

Still like some help from professionals to confirm or reject my analysis. People dealing with export on Schneier's blog gave feedback indicating they never ran into trouble. Yet, they might have been under the mass-market classification. So, I don't know if the other one is enforced or under what circumstances.